Noah is the Peter Zeihan of economics (not meant as an insult, quite the opposite :D). Always talking in deterministic terms even though these things are highly uncertain. But I rather have someone directly stating their MAP estimate (which I can then discount to my own liking and experience) rather than diluting the statemant with unspecific caveats. I also really love the long-term view and topics that you manage to still focus on. Usually, these podcasts divert to being news shows and all the lame current thing bs (like the all in podcast to a large extent). I also find these tangents you were going on quite interesting (about the jet engines etc.) Another remark: At least in the US you have plenty of land that is not in anyones backyard (NIMBYism seems to decay at least quadratically with distance). Not a luxury that we have over here in Germany.
Technology doesn't only give society more options. Because of competition/geopolitics it forces societies in certain directions. Because of what it enables, it also locks societies into sustained use of certain technologies if those things that got enabled gets realised. A historical example is the green revolution. It enabled populations to balloon because food production went up massively, but we cannot get back to a non-artifically fertilized, non mechanized small scale aggriculture anymore because that would mean millions would starve... we kindof have to keep doing what we do, even if it has all kinds of ecological side-effects that might be bad. The same is true for energy-production, we need a constant supply of energy or we couldn't keep our high technology society running, even if we might for other reasons (like again ecological degradation) want to scale it back. We need more more and more just to keep going... that is not a choice or option.
Good sht with the Destiny debate bro, I'm in violent agreement with what you said their, barring the nukes part. DGG loved it m8, every1 was praising you in chat. ty for showing dman he needs to up his military history game. I'm sure he will
what we must confront is that when a region is not developed US in 1870s-1940s PRC 1970s-2010s across asia 1940s-1970s Europe 1940s-1970s all the rules, worker safety, OT/hours worked, mass level industrialization get thrown out then there is a wave of consolidation, stability, unionization, labor turnover, capital returns fall etc.. TOLA (Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas) should really become our new mid west.. full integration into Northern Mexico Industrial belt.. but this requires massive infrastructure investment (poor rail, energy, transport networks, ports) between TOLA & Mexico which is very weak.. basically a new Mega-Region Nobody talks about cost of capital, massive intensive industries (energy, labor, robots, industrial automation) in a ZIRP environment capital was cheap but in a normal rate world the small surgical use of capital for investment projects ROI becomes a constraint of scaling. i.e. building your 3yr business case for industrial automation, robotic integration projects when its 8% as the corporate rate of return on your bond then all projects are measured against it. high regulatory, compliance industries prevent any agility or dynamic risk taking of business models with a expected rate of return on large amount of capital the high regulatory industry is a barrier to entry which requires massive low rate of return of capital Aerospace has a massive constraint zero deaths, 100% engineering reliability, massive long term capital ZIRP levels, smaller Planes increase risk dramatically 99% of fatalities are smaller planes.. with massive expansion, scaling that number will explode then insurance will crush the risk, which will then freeze the innovation curve & the massive providers will leverage all the gains the following 25yrs Energy nuclear v Solar/WInd If we build 100s of traditional nuclear reactors also nuclear is the lowest long term low cost base power, your avg price is investment divided by plant time active which can be 100yrs zero carbon except concrete at scale they require 10,000s of people per reactor, 10yrs each across the value chain which would drive millions of 2-3x avg wage jobs plus 100s HVDC long distance lines, distribution heat & energy optimization which would directly & indirectly generate 10 million jobs plus their multiplier effects (taxes, redevelopment) in those communities would produce 10% to GDP for s $2 Trillions the knock on effects of 100,000s of new engineers which would generate 100s of new sub verticals & startups in new industrial sectors
Noah? What do you think about whether the great stagnation is over? I am sure you know of the Robert Gordon bet. I think Gordon is going to win. But let's consider a new proposition, merely adding 4 to the years, so it lasts from 2024-2033. Do you think we will an average total factor productivity growth greater than 1.8 percent in those years?
Both both SpaceX and Tesla built their massive factories in the middle of nowhere in a desert in a state that's much more pro-development. Which is probably the only way it can be done but nimby's aren't really a problem when you go buy 10,000 acres in the desert and no one's near you.
It is tough to square the circle though of wanting to copy Elon musk with the negative worker stories coming out of his companies. The lack of unionization, The unsafe workplaces early in Tesla's development, The push for unreasonable amounts of overtime from the workers, etc. his company is also tended to bank on a passion that some industries use to chronically underpay their workers relative to others, We see the same thing in education and in video game development. The question is how you bring that over to say the insurance industry. It is cool to see how SpaceX can develop through rapid iteration and its capital-rich environment. It's unfortunate that we can't seem to replicate that with NASA for example, They were never given the leeway to do that sort of thing even when they were racing to the moon. On the nimby topic, lots of nimbyism is not illogical, though they're definitely is lots that are. Lots of the nimbyism Is a logical response to externalities that are uncompensated. I just find it interesting that Noah doesn't talk about using economic mechanisms and pricing those externalities. When a large apartment building gets built in a single-family home neighborhood the benefits are all diffuse but the costs of increased traffic lack of parking etc are all local. A system where neighborhoods could bid for a new projects and those projects and their increased density could directly reduce their costs. So sure there's more traffic in this parking but also your property taxes and water bill would be discounted. Simply turning uncompensated externalities into compensated externalities would likely do a lot. Sure you we'll still get these built in poor neighborhoods but then those residents will get a direct benefit from it.
Lol as soon as you refer to something as gay people stop taking your point seriously. Better to use an actual description of what about the intro is frustrating. I agree though they are very annoying when you want to just watch the podcast but that's a pretty popular style to clip the most catching parts and I do have to admit that if I'm not really feeling the topic of the title of the episode hearing something interesting does make me want to continue watching it. I think as a big fan you are not really the target of those intros You're going to watch it and enjoy it anyway. It's to catch the interest of the marginal listener
Noah is the Peter Zeihan of economics (not meant as an insult, quite the opposite :D). Always talking in deterministic terms even though these things are highly uncertain. But I rather have someone directly stating their MAP estimate (which I can then discount to my own liking and experience) rather than diluting the statemant with unspecific caveats. I also really love the long-term view and topics that you manage to still focus on. Usually, these podcasts divert to being news shows and all the lame current thing bs (like the all in podcast to a large extent).
I also find these tangents you were going on quite interesting (about the jet engines etc.)
Another remark: At least in the US you have plenty of land that is not in anyones backyard (NIMBYism seems to decay at least quadratically with distance). Not a luxury that we have over here in Germany.
Technology doesn't only give society more options. Because of competition/geopolitics it forces societies in certain directions. Because of what it enables, it also locks societies into sustained use of certain technologies if those things that got enabled gets realised. A historical example is the green revolution. It enabled populations to balloon because food production went up massively, but we cannot get back to a non-artifically fertilized, non mechanized small scale aggriculture anymore because that would mean millions would starve... we kindof have to keep doing what we do, even if it has all kinds of ecological side-effects that might be bad. The same is true for energy-production, we need a constant supply of energy or we couldn't keep our high technology society running, even if we might for other reasons (like again ecological degradation) want to scale it back. We need more more and more just to keep going... that is not a choice or option.
Good sht with the Destiny debate bro, I'm in violent agreement with what you said their, barring the nukes part. DGG loved it m8, every1 was praising you in chat. ty for showing dman he needs to up his military history game. I'm sure he will
what's the Ian Brook jet engine company they talked about briefly?
what we must confront is that when a region is not developed
US in 1870s-1940s
PRC 1970s-2010s
across asia 1940s-1970s
Europe 1940s-1970s
all the rules, worker safety, OT/hours worked, mass level industrialization get thrown out
then there is a wave of consolidation, stability, unionization, labor turnover, capital returns fall etc..
TOLA (Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas) should really become our new mid west.. full integration into Northern Mexico Industrial belt.. but this requires massive infrastructure investment (poor rail, energy, transport networks, ports) between TOLA & Mexico which is very weak.. basically a new Mega-Region
Nobody talks about cost of capital, massive intensive industries (energy, labor, robots, industrial automation) in a ZIRP environment capital was cheap but in a normal rate world the small surgical use of capital for investment projects ROI becomes a constraint of scaling. i.e. building your 3yr business case for industrial automation, robotic integration projects when its 8% as the corporate rate of return on your bond then all projects are measured against it.
high regulatory, compliance industries prevent any agility or dynamic risk taking of business models with a expected rate of return on large amount of capital
the high regulatory industry is a barrier to entry which requires massive low rate of return of capital
Aerospace has a massive constraint
zero deaths, 100% engineering reliability, massive long term capital ZIRP levels,
smaller Planes increase risk dramatically
99% of fatalities are smaller planes.. with massive expansion, scaling that number will explode
then insurance will crush the risk, which will then freeze the innovation curve & the massive providers will leverage all the gains the following 25yrs
Energy
nuclear v Solar/WInd
If we build 100s of traditional nuclear reactors also
nuclear is the lowest long term low cost base power, your avg price is investment divided by plant time active which can be 100yrs
zero carbon except concrete at scale
they require 10,000s of people per reactor, 10yrs each across the value chain which would drive millions of 2-3x avg wage jobs plus 100s HVDC long distance lines, distribution heat & energy optimization which would directly & indirectly generate 10 million jobs
plus their multiplier effects (taxes, redevelopment) in those communities would produce 10% to GDP for s $2 Trillions
the knock on effects of 100,000s of new engineers which would generate 100s of new sub verticals & startups in new industrial sectors
Noah? What do you think about whether the great stagnation is over? I am sure you know of the Robert Gordon bet. I think Gordon is going to win. But let's consider a new proposition, merely adding 4 to the years, so it lasts from 2024-2033. Do you think we will an average total factor productivity growth greater than 1.8 percent in those years?
Both both SpaceX and Tesla built their massive factories in the middle of nowhere in a desert in a state that's much more pro-development. Which is probably the only way it can be done but nimby's aren't really a problem when you go buy 10,000 acres in the desert and no one's near you.
It is tough to square the circle though of wanting to copy Elon musk with the negative worker stories coming out of his companies. The lack of unionization, The unsafe workplaces early in Tesla's development, The push for unreasonable amounts of overtime from the workers, etc. his company is also tended to bank on a passion that some industries use to chronically underpay their workers relative to others, We see the same thing in education and in video game development. The question is how you bring that over to say the insurance industry.
It is cool to see how SpaceX can develop through rapid iteration and its capital-rich environment. It's unfortunate that we can't seem to replicate that with NASA for example, They were never given the leeway to do that sort of thing even when they were racing to the moon.
On the nimby topic, lots of nimbyism is not illogical, though they're definitely is lots that are. Lots of the nimbyism Is a logical response to externalities that are uncompensated. I just find it interesting that Noah doesn't talk about using economic mechanisms and pricing those externalities. When a large apartment building gets built in a single-family home neighborhood the benefits are all diffuse but the costs of increased traffic lack of parking etc are all local. A system where neighborhoods could bid for a new projects and those projects and their increased density could directly reduce their costs. So sure there's more traffic in this parking but also your property taxes and water bill would be discounted. Simply turning uncompensated externalities into compensated externalities would likely do a lot. Sure you we'll still get these built in poor neighborhoods but then those residents will get a direct benefit from it.
Massive fan of you/Noah individually and love this podcast. As a fan, please stop doing these gay intros no one listens to
Lol as soon as you refer to something as gay people stop taking your point seriously. Better to use an actual description of what about the intro is frustrating. I agree though they are very annoying when you want to just watch the podcast but that's a pretty popular style to clip the most catching parts and I do have to admit that if I'm not really feeling the topic of the title of the episode hearing something interesting does make me want to continue watching it.
I think as a big fan you are not really the target of those intros You're going to watch it and enjoy it anyway. It's to catch the interest of the marginal listener
You mean like the highlight clips or the introduction of the guest?
I think it'd be fun to see a discussion between Noah Smith and Thunderf00t over whether or not Elon Musk is... efficacious.